IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10560 of 2019

======================================================

1.

The Union of India Through the Secretary Cum D.G., Department of Posts,

New Delhi.

2.

The Chief Postmaster General Bihar Circle, Patna.

3.

The Director of Postal Services (Hq) O/o Chief Postmaster General, Bihar

Circle, Patna.

4.

The Director Accounts (P) Patna GPO Campus, Patna.,

5.

The Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices Gaya Division, Gaya.

6.

The Assistant Superintendent of Posts Jehanabad Sub Devision, Jehanabad.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

Bindeshwari Prasad Son of Lagte jagdeo Prasad Resident of Village and P.O. -

Dharaut, Dharaut, P.s.- Makhdampur, District - Jehanabad.

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr.Rakesh Kr.Singh,CGC

For the Respondent/s

:

Mr.Surendra Mishra,Advocate

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI

and

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)

Date : 28-09-2022

The Union of India have assailed the order dated

31.10.2018 passed in OA No. 50/572/2017 passed by the Central

Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna.

The grievance of the respondent is to extend pension and

terminal benefits with reference to his service particulars that he

was initially appointed on ad hoc basis and he was given tempo-

rary appointment on 04.07.1991 and it was subsequently given

temporary status in the year 1994 read with the fact that he has at-

Patna High Court CWJC No.10560 of 2019 dt.28-09-2022

2/5

tained age of superannuation and retired from service on

31.10.2015. He has been given the Group-D post status.

Learned counsel for the respondent-Union of India only

contended that respondent refuse to accept promotion and his ser-

vice is temporary. Therefore, he is not entitled to pension and ter-

minal benefits.

The Tribunal examined the matter at Para 7 to 10 which

reads as under:-

“ Heard the parties and perused the

records as also orders passed by this Tribunal in

similarly employee’s cases. It is noticed that

undisputedly the applicant was granted Tempo-

rary Status on 04.07.1991, and after completion

of 3 years of his regular service, he was consid-

ered at par with Group-D employee accordingly

all benefits were extended to him. It is further

noticed that on 04.09.2015, the respondents had

offered him promotion to the post of MTS. How-

ever, the same was not accepted by the applicant

due to his illness and also on the point that he

was going to retired on 31.10.2015. Therefore,

he had requested to the respondents to allow him

to continue work with Temporary Status.

8. It is further notice that in the case of

similarly situated employees. The benefit of pen-

sion was denied by the respondents on the

ground of non-qualifying service. The said deci-

sion of the respondent was challenged by such

employees by way of OA, being OA No.

777/2016 and OA 609/2017 before this

Tribunal . After considering the various provi-

sions for the purpose of qualifying service for

grant of pension, the following observations/di-

rections were made by this Tribunal in its order

dated 20.09.2018passed in OA 777/2016 which

reads as under:-

Patna High Court CWJC No.10560 of 2019 dt.28-09-2022

3/5

“The temporary government servants

are entitled to pension, retirement gratuity/death

gratuity, family pension at the same scale as ad-

missible to permanent Government servant un-

der the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Undisput-

edly, the applicant has rendered more than 01

years of continuous service and as such his right

to claim pension has been accrued as per the

provisions of Rule 10 of CCS (TS) Rules, 1965

read with Rule-2 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.

14. In the present case, it is noticed

that the applicant has rendered more than 27